Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    December 2, 2011 6:30am-7:00am EST

6:30 am
numerous populist sloganeering against the power structures he was part of the group for opposing forces exemptions to the w t o. russia. lection two thousand eleven on march. the hour here in the russian capital this is r t the headlines at the u.n. says the crisis in syria has become a symbol of daily bloodshed now resulting in more than four thousand deaths in nine months now this comes as the e.u. ramps up pressure on the country with more financial and energy sanctions. germany and france are urging europe to come together in a fiscal union to ensure control and discipline as the member states continue to fight the economic storm are still battering the u.s. . egypt is holding its breath as it awaits the results of an opening stage of his
6:31 am
first parliamentary despite the fact many will bring about any real change protesters are demanding the military rulers step down and make way for a civilian government. right now if you stay with us here not see as a peter labelling this panel of experts discuss the deteriorating state of pakistan u.s. relations and how america's continued a war on terror could be poised to lose its most vital regional ally crosstalk. live. live live live live. live in the center of. the center of the live.
6:32 am
below in a welcome across our computer a little going from very bad to even worse this is the state of u.s. pakistan relations after a cross border attack that left up to twenty pakistanis dead and pakistani public opinion outraged and the stakes could not be higher for the obama administration counting on pakistan's support to wind down the last war in afghanistan. live to the center of the city. cross-talk u.s. pakistani relations i'm joined by r.k. by g.d.r. in washington he is the senior research associate at the american enterprise institute also in washington we have robert right near he is chairman of the advisory board of e.r. g. partners and the cia's former top counterterrorism official all right gentlemen this is crosstalk i mean you can jump in anytime you want and i very much encourage it but first let's go to our correspondent is it doesn't look like these two countries are at loggerheads are they going to have
6:33 am
a collision well we'll see if it goes this far but it does appear that all efforts to mend this troubled relationship are experiencing repeated reversal we've seen this here the killing of two pakistanis by a cia contractor and he says mission of osama bin laden more recently the u.s. accusations of pakistan's collaboration with militants and now a deadly nato air strike that hits an all time low. the attacks last friday were still at least twenty four pakistani soldiers has caused outrage in islamabad and prompted an indefinite shut down of transit routes and supply need. troops in afghanistan the pakistani army called the air strike unprovoked and questioned why it lasted two hours and targeted well known border posts. this was a premeditated murder of this person sources and i think the parts on government was not enough just dropping the nickel supplies and the junk should be this has got to go i think the most will be going back which is what pakistan appears to be
6:34 am
doing it is boycotting the bomb conference on afghanistan and it's also said to be considering anything up to determination over its involvement in the afghan war meanwhile washington says it's unsatisfied with islam about its unwillingness to crack down on taliban fractions for too long extremists have been able to operate here in pakistan and from pakistani soil the nosedive in u.s. pakistan relations is badly timed but president barack obama's plans to wind down the of canister and mission and begin the withdrawal of american troops to try to avert any real damage washington to is now said to be hearing its cooperation strategy with islamabad but all in all experts on both sides of the fence agree that mutual dependence is very likely to drive the two parties back to the negotiating table for pakistan anything short of losing u.s. aid while for you was it would at the very least mean resorting to other logistical partners in the region and the option it's currently disinclined to use so strong as both countries may feel we'll turn to is there still worse ok let's talk about
6:35 am
some of those alternatives first i'd like to go to robert you wrote an article pakistan going rogue you said it is hard to judge such things from a distance but the pakistani reaction this time feels qualitatively different from the crises preceding it over the past few months what do you mean by that what is qualitatively different this time because there's march's reporting pointed out there's been a lot of downs and further downs in this relationship recently. you know that there have in the past the procession at least it has been that even when the pakistanis were very angry even when they were making threats of a future actually to take for instance if the u.s. were to launch a other across more operations such as the one that it launched to in the targeted killing of bin laden back in may even then the pakistanis were leaving certain the scape hatches open if you will if you will as they were they still returned to the tail rotor of the last helicopter that went down during that operation angry as
6:36 am
they were they still ugly the u.s. to have access to some of the survivors with members of bin laden's family here at the compound i don't see the pakistanis trying to hold open a door this time this just seems qualitatively different to me i mean when you think about there we had a tipping point right now because robert brings up a whole lot of points that are quite valid here and we're still talk about the bonn conference that the pakistanis are going to at least at this point in time are boycotting yes i think that the relationship between the two countries have reached their lowest point in ten years since the start of war and terrorism and afghanistan the latest incident the killing of twenty four pakistani soldiers by nato was just an incident waiting to happen indeed there have been as a result been so wish damage pakistani is relationship over the past year nearly the rest of this operator in pakistan killing off been allowed in and also it
6:37 am
is accusations that the pakistani intelligence agency was involved in the attack against the u.s. embassy in pakistan but the latest incident just added to that i believe that the relationship is in a critical and a crisis situation but i don't think that it's a breaking point and i don't think that there will be a complete breakdown of the relationship between the two anytime soon and the reason for that is that both countries need each other all. far different purposes we have to understand that the relationship between pakistan and the united states is not is strategic alliance is shared interest but rather it is a marriage of convenience or at transactional relationship but that both sides need each other but they have conflicting interests it's interesting robert if i can be counterintuitive here and this is what i read i hear all the time is that if this is a deadly embrace it's a bad marriage but it's going to continue one but because it's a bad marriage both sides can make mistakes quote unquote because you know the other side isn't going to walk away and that's that's the dilemma here right now
6:38 am
because you the level of trust is so low that each side can continue fighting their own war on terror and therefore these two countries are fighting very different wars on terror i think that's absolutely right that they are fighting it two very different wars and the u.s. is demanding that pakistan should aid the u.s. in fighting it for the pakistanis say no we've got our hands full thank you very much you can fight your own fight and just because you are inciting militants on our side of the border to attack your troops on the afghan side that doesn't necessarily create a problem for us or one that we necessarily feel that we have to address and the u.s. side that sounds a great deal like collusion with the enemy i mean if i can go back to you it seems to me in looking over this troubled relationship of the last decade for the united states to get out of afghanistan with any sense of dignity by two thousand and fourteen it would be essential he has to destroy pakistan in the process.
6:39 am
absolutely so this is this is that what pakistani and i understand they know that they have a major card to play here and they have a lot of leverage with the united states for the need to military supplies through and through their countries they know that shutting down will be a big blow to the. years operations inside afghanistan and also. needs pakistan for a political settlement in afghanistan to bring that caliban on the table but we have to understand that the leverage that pakistan has and also the u.s. dependence on on pakistan will diminish just down the road in one or two years we know that they use needed pakistan to cooperate against al qaeda but osama bin laden is killed and many of our senior al qaeda leaders are killed already and their operations are disrupted significantly inside pakistan and also as the military footprint is there managing afghanistan so well be dependent on pakistan
6:40 am
so in the near future years can put more pressure on pakistan and i believe that it will. pursue a tougher line with pakistani government and this there pakistani military and i say those are changes called militant policies ok robert engle back to you are going to go back to that article that you wrote pakistan going rogue you wrote a variant of it the u.s. has far more at stake in pakistan afghanistan can you explain that because it's very interesting in light of what a lot of republican candidates have been saying about pakistan during the recent debates. you know i think just building on some of that you said a moment ago that in the process of trying to to win or at least create a dignified exit for itself in afghanistan u.s. runs the risk of helping to destroy pakistan. i think that this is quite true and i think that our obsession with afghanistan is tending to blind us to the fact that
6:41 am
a great deal more harm to american interests could arise as a result of the dissolution of. civil society and politics in pakistan i disagree in a way that the u.s. is going to be able to to. increase its leverage over pakistan at the same time as their leverage of the united states over time decreases yes there is the matter of aid i think that we over. i think we overestimate the degree of leverage that that gives us as much as the pakistanis would like to see continuation of u.s. aid i don't think that that's going to be a critical factor for them in making decisions about their national security going forward and and i fear a situation where the u.s. and pakistan essentially are not talking to one another they are not they're not cooperating with one another and that pakistan is essentially are going off on their own with it it's interesting i mean if i go back to you say you know the u.s.
6:42 am
will leave eventually afghanistan in one form or another and pakistan will still be bordering on afghanistan and this is what the pakistanis are angling on aren't they i mean they're not going anywhere it's their neighborhood and they will determine the regional dynamics because the capital of the united states has is just a minute over time and maybe very quickly. as events unfold with a departure from afghanistan. well that's the most important point in the because the pakistanis are uncertain about the long term commitment off the united states and the international community and afghanistan i myself have spoken to many senior pakistani off the shelves on the they are also uncertain about this system the ability. of the afghan government they don't know that after two thousand and fourteen if the government of president has they will be in place once the foreign troops leave so that's why that they are still supporting their proxies the taliban for future influence in afghanistan i gained seats archrival enemy and also to have
6:43 am
dominance so that this policy for the united states and also for nato countries would be to show i mean during commitment to afghanistan not just and cultism fourteen but past two thousand and fourteen and to be united states should make it clear that it will not abandon the region once again once and for all and was stay there and the government of afghanistan will be supported by the international community that will send a very positive and very clear signal to the pakistani establishment that the taliban are not future of the afghanistan they have to increase their left richard to illegitimate to a strong current government not through the militant groups ok gentlemen we're going to go to a short break and after that short break we'll continue our discussion on toxic state of origin. in the media. military if you look at. the military.
6:44 am
magine assets. home watches show every single mom please and waiting for you to stumble. i saw men with a video camera so i moved over and she phoned me some of them you know we realized they were following everyone from early in the morning. the only chance to get rid of him. is to reveal him. to. me. on archie. are. wealthy british scientists like. dr oz.
6:45 am
markets financed scandals find out what's really happening to the global economy for a no holds barred look at the global financial headline is going to cause a report on r.g.p. . to keep it straight. and. welcome across all computable about three mind you were discussing the relations between islamabad and washington. to keep it stirred. ok robert i'd like to go back to you in the war on terror that the united states has called over the last decade has had a really huge hole in pakistan and i think western audiences particularly the
6:46 am
united states are not really aware of that are they to how many people have died. as this conflict goes on and the another issue is the radicalization of politics and in pakistan i mean it has to be one of the most anti-american countries in the world i mean this is the cost of fighting a war a war that is not that is certainly not winnable in afghanistan in the united states is going to leave i mean my goodness what a net loss all the way around for the united states in the region. it's hard to paint a pretty picture coming out of this there have been many unintended consequences of the a large scale u.s. presence in afghanistan and as you point out one of those is the increasing islamic radicalization of pakistan and to the extent that the the pakistan government is identified or is is considered by many pakistani militants to be a part of the problem in fact could be allying itself and aiding the united states that has brought many of these domestic militants within pakistan in open warfare with their own government so less that the main preoccupation of the pakistanis
6:47 am
right now and i think that they fear that a continued large scale u.s. presence in afghanistan will continue the political deterioration within pakistan part of the problem here is that as has been pointed out the americans are not going to entirely go away the americans are going to maintain a presence in afghanistan they're not going to allow the taliban to overthrow the regime in kabul what they need to do and with the president has made clear they're going to do in a subtle way is to get their presence down to a manageable level the problem is that we lack credibility the pakistanis have no faith whatsoever that the u.s. is going to stay the course in any way shape or form in afghanistan and they're not going to believe it until they see it which creates huge problems for the americans in trying to manage their relations with the pakistanis is interesting i mean also one of the casualties of this ok in your war is that you basically see a civil war going on between pakistan's military and its civil authorities there i
6:48 am
mean with this memo gate that came out recently just shows the division between the two how can it continue for being a reliable partner of the united states if it doesn't even have its own house in order. yeah indeed that's just been problem in the relationship with. pakistan because in pakistan the military has the absolute authority and if we see over the past two years. has sideline the civilian government we saw after bin ladin scaling. government of president zardari subordinated all the foreign policy today military and when it comes to the key and vital decision making about pakistan foreign policy is similar to you which just makes the shots not this unfortunately over the past decade and indeed since the inception of relationship between the two countries over the past
6:49 am
five years the united states has on the pakistani military and doesn't has not helped in a significant way this of indian government and democracy in the country which is good for the for pakistan and also for security in the region and it's time to change to that policy and to continues engaging and continue to support this. civilian government and also this is a civil society in pakistan which are working for the progress of pakistan and add a hand to get a tough ally with the military establishment. and sit a clear carrot and stick policy and make it clear to the military establishment that they cannot continue their current policy of supporting militants without consequences and i think also deny this is happening have i found a mental change in their relationship with pakistan right now regarded pakistan policy and also engage in afghanistan it should engage with pakistan if pakistan
6:50 am
continues to if pakistan brings a change in this policy and stop supporting the militants but if pakistan continues despite your nice a should have a plan b. and that should be to contain the bad actions of the pakistani military in the future ok remedies are possible because you've written many occasions that american policy towards the pakistan in the region in general is really useful seriously flawed. and i guess what i would say is that it is find it to say that the us to be. trying to support civilian governance in pakistan and trying to act is a brake on the actions of the pakistan military part of the difficulties here however is that the civilian political authorities in pakistan are a pretty unlovely bunch. they lack political support they're highly corrupt.
6:51 am
these are not necessarily the sorts of people on whose side we want to. be playing unequivocally so there's a huge difficulty there the other difficulty is that many people tend to assume that well look. the pakistanis have it within their power to control the afghan taliban that if if pakistan were only willing that it could remove the safe havens and they could essentially deliver the the different elements of the insurgency to the negotiating table and fortunately that too is is incorrect the pakistanis could certainly be more helpful than they have been in recent years but they can't deliver these people these people pose a threat a tremendous threat to pakistan itself and is a threat that the pakistanis cannot by themselves control but it kind of it is echo what robert was saying right there i mean would you be the pakistani taliban that their card up their sleeve when the americans leave because again we keep going around in circles here is that pakistan wants to determine the future of
6:52 am
afghanistan and make sure that it's a friendly state and this is the great dilemma here and going off with roberts and also when it will the presence of an american american troops there still be a big barrier for is what i'm about to get their way and eventually in afghanistan . well as i mentioned. before i think that this illusion to afghanistan does not lie in the alliance of pakistan we the united states has failed to change it facts and policy regarding the afghan taliban over the past ten years and i don't think that pakistan will change its policy regarding supporting the afghan taliban. here are just until two thousand and fourteen so that's why dissolution lies inside afghanistan did i to say it has to understand that the key solution to that is to strengthen the afghan government and also there have been national security forces to enable them and not to prevent the return of the taliban al-qaeda and defend their country against them
6:53 am
i don't also after two thousand and fourteen definitely well be a level of insurgency happening in that region so there is a need of it is a tool use force is something maybe between twenty thousand which should continue contacting a counterterrorism operations against the taliban al qaeda and also helping the afghan national army which is not able to defend against the taliban on its own exactly we're going to go back to the pakistanis saying they're not going to go to the phone conference i mean how much of a slap in the is a real slap in the face or do something symbolic at this point in time because pakistan is very confident that there will be some kind of settlement or they'll be a big player in it you can walk away from this conference right now with confidence at least giving the americans a notice that the for public opinion purposes at home they have to be listened to more in apology is needed more than a holiday for what happened at the border crossing. yeah i think that the
6:54 am
pakistanis can fairly securely walk away from this conference at the end of the day if that is all a part of participants in this process such as it is or equal pakistan has a great deal more weight at the table and an international crisis to try to bring about a political solution in afghanistan that does not include pakistan is a process that is going to go absolutely nowhere what do you think about that argument i mean is this a big deal being done for public opinion purposes back in islam about showing because like it's very interesting the military is taking advantage of this tragic situation by saying look we're waving the flag we're going to play tough with the americans we're going to shut down the supply routes the cia operations the drones are going to be suspended thrown out eccentrics under their shoulders showing themselves to be quite tough right now and that's what the public wants. yeah you are absolutely right many of the retaliatory actions that pakistan has taken after twenty four soldiers of it was killed by any terrorist strike has been
6:55 am
a. domestic audience far just a mistake on sanction because after dinner. our mistake has really been tarnished and their initial inside pakistan so the army needs to just shows. how one has to just take a very tough stance against the united states to retain this procedure inside pakistan so that's why it has just kept nato supplies it has asked the united states to leave the shamsi base which is a use for drones attacks but i think that this will change pakistan has taken similar actions in the past but then has reversed at. times come in and similarly about the bonn conference i think this is a big disadvantage to pakistan and it's somehow ironic that practice and usually complains that pakistan is not given a proper role that it is our faith in the end game in afghanistan but when there is an international conference that is deciding on the future also i was going to stand then he just walks away without from that and i think that this just
6:56 am
a minute pakistan's role in the end game in afghanistan so this is not good for pakistan itself robert. the americans learned anything from this event here because really we got a lot of different versions of what happened out of the pentagon and in the state department in they'll be an investigational there but i mean is there a learning curve here or are we just all agreed we're just going to u.s. and pakistan are just going to go from one bad experience to another until there's some kind of critical mass two thousand and fourteen what we're american withdrawal and we're just going to continue seeing these things. well i'm not sure that a resolution if there can be one of this cross border incident is really going to be all that important i don't think the pakistanis at the end of the day are going to be satisfied with any of the americans explanations that they they simply will believe what they want to believe i mean i don't have any reasonable this was anything other than an unfortunate accident but what i think is far more significant here is not so much the incident itself and the aftermath of it but the
6:57 am
evidence that this brings of increasing degree of brittleness in the us pakistan relationship a couple of years ago the relationship could have withstood an incident like this now it really can't and so i think the underlying situation is far more significant then this this particular unfortunate incident. very sorry very interesting discussion many thanks my guess would be in washington thanks for viewers for watching us here to see you next time remember prospects for. free. free. free. free free.
6:58 am
free. free. free broncos video for your media. c.d.o. don carty talk to tom. it.
6:59 am


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on